1954 Buick 40 vs. 2000 Mercedes-Benz E
To start off, 2000 Mercedes-Benz E is newer by 46 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1954 Buick 40. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1954 Buick 40 would be higher. At 5,439 cc (8 cylinders), 2000 Mercedes-Benz E is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2000 Mercedes-Benz E (349 HP @ 4200 RPM) has 156 more horse power than 1954 Buick 40. (193 HP @ 4100 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2000 Mercedes-Benz E should accelerate faster than 1954 Buick 40. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1954 Buick 40 weights approximately 275 kg more than 2000 Mercedes-Benz E.
Both vehicles are rear wheel drive (RWD) - it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, both vehicles do the job better than front wheel drive vehicles. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 2000 Mercedes-Benz E (530 Nm) has 120 more torque (in Nm) than 1954 Buick 40. (410 Nm). This means 2000 Mercedes-Benz E will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1954 Buick 40.
Compare all specifications:
| 1954 Buick 40 | 2000 Mercedes-Benz E | |
| Make | Buick | Mercedes-Benz |
| Model | 40 | E |
| Year Released | 1954 | 2000 |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 5279 cc | 5439 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 8 cylinders | 8 cylinders |
| Engine Type | V | V |
| Valves per Cylinder | 2 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 193 HP | 349 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4100 RPM | 4200 RPM |
| Torque | 410 Nm | 530 Nm |
| Engine Bore Size | 101.6 mm | 97 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 81.4 mm | 91.9 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 8.5:1 | 10.5:1 |
| Drive Type | Rear | Rear |
| Vehicle Weight | 1720 kg | 1445 kg |
| Wheelbase Size | 3110 mm | 2720 mm |
